i500}; flame anti 332mm»:
Two VAXISHIXG GAME BIRDS! WOODCOCK AND THE WOOD Doc'. 7 A. K. FISHEK. Ornithologist Biologi- cal Survey. YeareBook U. 5. Dept. of Agriculture, rgor. pp. H74 ,
Dr, Fisher’s experience as a sportsman. combined with his wide knowledge as an ornithologist, permits him to speak with unusual authoritativeness on the question of game protection, This paper. therefore. as might be expected, is one of the most prac- tical. convincing contributions to the subject which has come to our attention ment is an admirable thing in itself, but a weak weapon when turned toward those who observe the game laws simply because they might be subjected to penalty for breaking them; and the strength of Dr, Fisher’s argument lies in the hard, sound undeniable fact: on which it is based He shows the rapid decrease of Woodcock and Wood Duck, and then proves. and proves conclusively, that if these birds are not given better and more uniform protection than they now receive they will become practically exterminated.~F, M. C.
Senti-
CHEcx-Lts'r OF CALIFORNIA Bums, Bv Joseeu GRINNELL. Pacific Coast AVA» fauna No. Cooper Ornithological Club. Santa Clara, Califr Svo. 98 pages, 2 maps.
An annotated list of California birds has long been one of the wants of working ornithologists which the author of the list under consideration is well qualified to fillr He enumerates 49: species and subspecies as duly entitled to recognition as California birds, and under each one gives, as synonyms, tlte names which have also been applied to it as a California bird, and its “status” or manner of occurrence. Maps, based on climatic conditions, outline the "life zones" and "faunal areas" adopted by the author, and greatly assist the reader in understanding that portion of the work which relates to distribution.
While we should be grateful to Mr.
Grinnell for the preparation of a paper which will undoubtedly be useful. we be- lieve its value would have been increased by the inclusion of the dates of occurrence of the rarer species, with references to the publication in which their capture was re- corded. Again. with no desire to be over- critical, we cannot but feel that the interests of ornithology in California—the ‘Check- Us we understand is intended chiefly for younger studentsfiwould have better served had the author accepted the verdict of the A. Or U. Committee by omitting numbers of races which the committee has rejected ML Grinnell is, of course, entitled to opinion in regard to the desirability of recognizing these forms. but it is unfor- tunatethat the "younger students " of Call- fornia‘s birds should be called upon to learn, even by name, birds which have been declared by those perhaps better qualified to judge than Mr. Grinnell, not worth the naming.
In any event. there is no excuse for giving these rejected forms the apparent endorse- ment of the A. 0. u. by placing before their names, without other comment than an unexplained "part." the A. O. Ur Check-List number.7F. M. C.
MORE TALES or rue Bums. By w. WARDE FOWLER. Illustrated by FRANCES L. FULLER. The Macmillan Co. rgozr rzmo. 232 pages, 8 plates.
We have no American writer on birds with whom Mr, Fowler can be compared; er from those of our popular authors, and make his ‘tales‘ a singular combination of fact and fancy which it would be hazardous for a less skilful writer to attempt to duplicate, His birds talk, but they are a true ornithologisl's bird for all that, and each story emphasizes the close relation which should and does exist be- tween birds and man. and is admirably adapted to awaken genuine sympathy with bird life.—F. M. C.
his methods
(163)
